OMFG! Beason's Coming!

Compared to the Spencer deal, didn't Spencer got $6 mil right off, split in one way or another? That was a $9 mil a year deal over five years. So I don't think we gave up a ton of bonus there, we just deferred some to year 3.

Whether we gave up more in year 1 or not, that's to our advantage. The cap hit overall is less, the money's theoretically recoupable (which, I still don't get why this is such a big deal - retirement or career ending stupidity is generally small in late first round picks), and to me, the bigger part of the bonus should come at signing.

The key difference between the two contracts is that Beason got a good deal more overall, I believe - $12.5 mil versus $9 mil. For a defensive player one slot ahead that's a big raise, and suggests some concessions to get the deal done. This is likely in year 5 salary, at which time the team would be naturally inclined to make a new offer anyway. But the $3.5 mil difference is a 28% difference.

 

I am on the side that thinks we would have been a better team with Key than without him. I also wish I knew the reason we let him go. However, my point was simply it's an inaccurate satement to say we had "no reason" to let him go.

Your probably right on the safety issue, but I just can't get worked up over the fact that we did not take one in the draft. I like the decisions we made as the draft unfolded. If Harris works out for us, we may be glad we took a Kalil and Johnson rather than a safety at those slots.

Remember that Denver took a punter who's ability lies in a medicine cabinet. I bet they wish they had Baker back.

I realize most don't agree with me that Hurney made a good move from the management side not agreeing to the 2nd year option...and I don't base my opinions on what I read from others. Just because you believe you make a good case does not automatically mean all must know agree. I stand by the fact that imho (yes my opinion) Hurney will be well respected in the GM's circle for the fact he got Beason under contract in a minor hold-out and did not agree with the 2nd year options. The question should be why is this 2nd year option clause so important to the player's agent that he would have him hold out to get it. If a team is willing to give the player the money, just without this option clause, then what's the problem. Beason should have signed this contract as is before camp. If we were willing to pay him, then why in the hell was he holding out for a clause that is no big deal....what's retarded is that Beason's agent had his player hold out for this clause.

 

The bonus isn't that much more than what Spencer got, but several million more overall (and rookies really have to suck to not see the end of their contract).

You knew what he meant, but fine. Let's say "no legitimate reason," "no performance-related reason," or "no reason that anyone else has a clue about." Take your pick.

I've already said repeatedly that I don't think they should have taken one in the draft either considering where guys went. The point is that they did absolutely nothing about it in free agency despise several solid guys being available at pretty low prices.

Mostly because you're obviously wrong.

The Gantt article already showed that the Panthers are laughed at because we routinely pay too much for players, and did you notice that Beason is getting several million more than not only Spencer (the guy drafted behind him) but Meriweather (24th pick) too? It just gives critics one more thing to laugh about.

If this contract had been offered then, he undoubtedly would have. In fact, a higher initial signing bonus is exactly what I suggested we do when this first came out, although I wouldn't have ended up giving him several million more in base than anyone else picked around him. The problem was that Hurney tried to low-ball Beason by being cheap and replacing the option bonus with incentives. That was ridiculous.

Oh good lord. Please read what I wrote because you don't understand what happened.

 

that's what I said, yes.

 

Opinions, inherently, can`t be wrong. Now the facts leading up to said opinions can be wrong, but not opinions per say.

 

Based on the legal ruling, it's simply idiotic to have this 2nd year option clause in a contract. I have seen nothing to verify that Beason's agent just wanted a better deal prior to camp. In fact, what I read suggested the impasse was ALL about the 2nd year option and in the end he gave in. My take from this is that had Beason's agent been willing to negotiate with the understanding the deal would not include the 2nd year option then we could have gotten this deal done prior to camp. If I missed evidence that Beason was not holding out because of the 2nd year option clause but simply wanted a more lucrative deal then my opinion that Hurney did the right thing will change.

 

funny, the value is a top 20 contract, as if the two sides split the difference between the 14 pick (unsigned, but 15 signed for a total of $15 mil over 5 years, $8 mil guaranteed) and the pick behind Beason, #26 (Spencer, 5 years, $9 mil total, $6 mil guaranteed).

 

The Panthers have not been on team who on balance was shy about spending money. In fact, Collin would likely suggest we often pay to much. Your facts above are just another pointer that we could have had this deal done sooner if Beason's agent had not insisted on the 2nd year option. That being said, Hurney did the right thing.

 

If Hurney set a precedent for what we won't do in the future, good. He could've handled it better. And if the agent was angling for money above the 25 spot, and got it, that's not especially good, but that's a concession to make the above work.

Bottom line, though, is we should've had him in sooner.

 

Easy thing to say from the sidelines........if having him in sooner meant agreeing to the 2nd year option, then no we should not have had him in sooner. If his agent was willing to negotiate a better deal than was on the table, but without the 2nd year option and we declined to negotiate then I would agree we screwed up and should have had him in sooner.